Houston schools stop using “Redskins” and other insensitive names

Posted by Michael David Smith on April 16, 2014, 5:40 AM EDT

Getty Images

As the NFL team in Washington continues to defend its use of the name Redskins, the franchise often points out that many high schools use the name. What the team doesn’t point out is that many schools are dropping the name, too.

Despite the team’s claim that “70 different high schools” use the name Redskins, several reports have indicated that the number is actually lower than that, and the Redskins are counting high schools that have already stopped using the name. The latest school to drop the name is Lamar High School in Houston, which announced this week that it will stop going by the name Redskins and start calling its teams the Texans.

That decision was part of a new policy announced by the Houston school district, preventing schools from using team names that are viewed as insensitive. Teams called the Indians, Warriors and Rebels are also changing their names.

If there weren’t teams such as the “Braves” and “Seminoles” I probably wouldn’t know these tribes existed. Blatantly offensive names and logos should change, but I hope it doesn’t come at the cost of awareness that these groups of people existed.

Redskins I understand. Indians I understand. But if you are offended by the name warriors then other people aren’t being insensitive. You’re just being insecure. Unless you object to your ethnic heritage being associated with sports. In which case the “Why is the fighting irish offensive?” argument is valid.

when i was in high school they had just started making all the schools in the district drop redskins and indians as mascots. my high school was the redskins, about a year or two after i graduated they became the redhawks.

all the schools who used warriors changed from using a depiction of an indian for the mascot to using a spartan for the depiction of the warrior.

the schools who were the rebels switched from using a southern colonel design to a american revolution looking design that looked similar to the patriots old logos.

Warriors is offensive? Ok? I will say (and as a skins fan I may be titled a jerk) the name is not viewed as a slur by any fans and we would be distraught if the name is changed. The name is a source of pride here in the DMV. If the name is changed, you can bet fans will continue to buy Redskins gear, especially because it will have lost trademark protections and will be easy to find. Just a thought.

“The term “red” was adopted by French and English by the 1750′s after the reference to “red man” was made in 1725 by a Taensa chief. According to the French (1725), the Taensa referred to themselves as “Red Men.” Three chiefs of the Piankashaws wrote (1769), “…You think that I am an orphan; but all the people of these rivers and all the redskins will learn of my death.” In 1807 French Crow (Wahpekute, Santee Sioux) said, “I am a redskin…”

johnodocks says:Apr 16, 2014 9:45 AM

The Vikings logo depicts the warrior caricature of people of Scandinavian descent. Anyone objecting to that?

1) Redskin term came from the use of red clay on the face before battle.
2) Nothing honors you more than to have a symbol of our people being used as a symbol of strength that brings an entire community together to cheer or cry as one.
3) Native Americans are not part of the easily offended class you whites suffer from.

For the comment about Vikings being a caricature of Scandinavians. While a valid point, U.S. history is absolutely filled with violence and heavy discrimination against particularly Native Americans and African Americans. The same is not true of immigrants northern/western Europe, which is why there’s more controversy concerning the use of images related to those people, opposed to the Vikings.

tinbender2000 says:Apr 16, 2014 10:27 AM

Danny won’t change the name because he wants it to be equally offensive to the product on the field.

Changing from Redskins to Texans is a wash. They’re both overhyped and typically suck.

randomcommenter says:Apr 16, 2014 11:00 AM

But high schools are not dropping the name because they think it’s offensive. They are being strong armed into dropping it by political groups.

It’s the same situation as small towns being forced to take down Nativity scenes because the socialist organization (that’s their founding mission statement, look it up) the ACLU, ties these small towns up in red tape, they don’t have the resources to fight it, so they get bullied into taking down a Nativity scene that the vast majority of their people want.

For the record I have heard the term “Cougar” used as a derogatory term for a female of advanced age who tries to attract younger aged males. This can be documented by doing a quick search on the internet. I just hope the University of Houston takes a cue from local high schools.

bobzilla1001 says:Apr 16, 2014 11:21 AM

ESPN’s Stephen A. Smith continually calls Washington, D.C., `Chocolate City.” Should the city’s pro football team then be nicknamed the “Chocolate Drops”? Just wondering.

mogogo1 says:Apr 16, 2014 11:23 AM

Welcome to the slippery slope. I guess we can forget about the “Colt 45s” ever making a comeback. And it won’t be long before “Texans” and “Cowboys” are deemed offensive to somebody.

SeenThisB4 says:Apr 16, 2014 11:24 AM

The University of Notre Dame needs to find another nick name as well! The Fighting Irish is so insensitive, that it boggles the liberal mind!

The average person would not use the term “redskin” in conversation with a native american. Doesn’t that tell you something about the proper use of the word? Those who bring up “warriors” or “rebels” are simply distractors who want to perpetuate this offensive term.

I demand the Tampa Bay Bucs change their logo. My Great Grand father was a Pirate.

cchicinfan says:Apr 16, 2014 11:57 AM

My usual test is if I am walking down the street and see a person the word would apply to (like a native American) that I don’t know, and call out to him “Hey Redskin” and feel it necessary to run, then it probably is inappropriate to use the word in any sense. I was never offended with the name Redskins until I applies this test.

The problem with the term Rebel though is situation based. My rule doesn’t apply, but a team in Canada called rebels wouldn’t necessarily be offense as it lacks the civil war history. A team in the US, and especially any where near the south, would undoubtably use a “Johnny Reb” image as a mascot, and rightly be alienating and offensive to any black person and any white northern person who lost family in the civil war. Yes, very inappropriate and divisive.

Warrior , however is the biggest stretch I have seen of any kind. Period.

RE LEE says:Apr 16, 2014 12:00 PM

The way the liberals demonized the tea party, I’m wondering how soon they will turn against the Patriots. Our country has changed so much. Christianity is getting booted out of classrooms and the military, our flag is considered offensive to some in our own country, and now there are free speech zones. It’s telling that now we have to self-censure even names of sports team. We are losing our collective spines.

For the record, the Warrior reference in question here was actually an Indian. The mascot and logo was an Indian chief, so it was technically an Indian warrior. The rebel was a reference to the confederate rebels and the mascot was a confederate holding the confederate flag. These weren’t just vague references to ANY kind of warrior and ANY kind of rebel. Just FYI

justintuckrule says:Apr 16, 2014 12:17 PM

Faux News crowd out in droves this morning I see.

inallsincerity says:Apr 16, 2014 12:18 PM

But nobody in H-Town has a problem with the name of America’s most prestigious golf tournament, “The Masters”???

rrthomasxyz says:
Apr 16, 2014 11:44 AM
The average person would not use the term “redskin” in conversation with a native american. Doesn’t that tell you something about the proper use of the word? Those who bring up “warriors” or “rebels” are simply distractors who want to perpetuate this offensive term.
____________________________

I’d happily use the term Redskin. It isn’t offensive.

302baller says:Apr 16, 2014 12:20 PM

Redskins Redskins Redskins Redskins……sounds like a team name only.

eleventyeight says:Apr 16, 2014 12:23 PM

Context.

Why would any competitive team in a very physical sort call themselves anything weak, negative, derogatory, divisive or in any other way indicative of anything other than powerful, successful, skillful, respected, dignified, honorable and pride-inducing.

If that were the case why aren’t there teams named the “French Army”?

tomthumbsblues says:Apr 16, 2014 12:25 PM

Did Dan Snyder call someone a ” redskin ” when he visited those 26 reservations last fall/ Probably not.

Did he use the name ” Redskins ” and Washington Redskins ” while on the reservations?

A large group of people find Redskins offensive.
A larger group does not… That doesn’t mean its not offensive!
In 1861 A large group thought slavery was not good.
A larger group thought it was great. It was not!
If someone finds another team name offensive this is America get a large group together & fight for a change or to stay the same. These people are passionate & put in work for their change & do not just sit around & complain about how bad the country is, but try to make it better for their pacific group

Still waiting for Peter King and Bob Costas to start their tour of Native American reservations to bring up awareness and help to those who need it. Oh wait, they just want to see an NFL team change their name. I guess fight the battle that’s more convenient, and less hassle for you.

NOBODY, I repeat, NOBODY uses the word Redskins as a derogatory slur! I always hear people say, “well can you imagine walking down the street and calling a native american a ‘redskin’?”

That is such garbage. No one uses the term to a people. It is no where near the same issue as the N word or any other racial or ethnic slur. Why? Because no one uses it as a racial or ethnic slur. I live in a community with a fairly large tribal population, and no one uses “redskins” as a slur. There are plenty of other slurs to throw around, but that one is just not hard enough for today modern A-holes to use.

And I’m going out on a limb here to suggest that the Warriors and Rebels could have simply changed the logo and/or mascot without changing the name.

jackofnotrades says:Apr 16, 2014 1:55 PM

redskins…awesome name/awesome logo/awesome colors..i look at it as a sign of respect not derogatory..get over it.

A Raider and Buccaneer are offensive given we know what pirates did to people. Also a Patriot is a Rebel that won the war on his land against an oppressive force. The name Redskins will change and is offensive but anyone can be offended by a multitude of things depending on where you’re from. IMO

The Vikings logo depicts the warrior caricature of people of Scandinavian descent. Anyone objecting to that?
No because the term Viking is not and never has been derogatory, there is not positive spin on Redskin, no matter how u and others try. It is in and of itself derogatory

Couple hundred years too late to be shedding crocodile tears for the indigenous peoples of this country. We’d all be watching futbol somewhere in Western Europe if those calling the shots actually, ya know, genuinely cared about the plight of the Native Americans.

My ancestors were invaded and looted by the vikings and then smacked around by the Irish. The names Vikings and Fighting Irish offends me.

Oh and my father died in a plane accident, so the name Jets offends me.

And I once got sick eating a bufflo burger, so the name Bills offends me.

bunkmcnulty says:Apr 16, 2014 3:09 PM

Sadly, the pendulum swings too far. However, if the poster stating the “context” for banning Warrior and Rebel is correct, then I applaud someone for using fact, rather than opinion to say why the actions in Houston are right or wrong.

I personally don’t like Redskins (the name), yet at the same time, I respect that it may not need to change. My issue with these discussions are the idiots that come out trying to invoke pretend offense to Vikings, and every other totally inappropriate comparison to that that offends based on one’s skin color specifically used in the name.

Come on people…if you come on a message board and claim to be, in this case, a Native American I can’t take you seriously. It’s just too easy to claim you are anything in order to make your point under the guise of anonymity.

eleventyeight says:Apr 16, 2014 3:30 PM

What seems to be missing is the fact that American Indian warriors intentionally colored their skin red during war and raiding party’s, and they proved such fearsome and powerful and courageous and skillful and selfless warriors that even those who fought against and *feared* them spoke of those warriors with awe and respect, going so far as to -honor- them by elevating their memory to the level of other great and powerful warriors of history and legend.

Only a few people and small groups are fussing about the matter, while those same few people and groups just happen to be getting money and publicity from their complaints; not exactly the actions of those with honorable and selfless intent.

Change the name all you want… we will still be the “Redskins” in our hearts… notable Lamar H.S. REDSKIN alums:

Brian Orakpo
Josh Gordon
Brandon LaFell
Gerome Sapp

wydok says:Apr 16, 2014 4:05 PM

Warriors could be offensive if the mascot is a Native American. Although it’s not nearly as bad as Redskin.

seanb20124 says:Apr 16, 2014 4:32 PM

Were coming after you next Golden State Warriors

defscottyb says:Apr 17, 2014 3:22 PM

RED in Redskins is a reference to Red war paint worn in battle and NOT skin color. A tiny few just see Red and Skin and automatically assume it just has to be racist. Oh yeah I am 1/2 Cherokee and my whole family are Redskins fans. We see it as an honor and not in the least disrespectful. I was reading a story about Susan Harjo that activist against the Redskins first court battle in 1992. She was actually a Redskins fan and was at a Skins game in DC when she felt “harassed” for some reason for being Native so she went on a life long mission against them. Talk about being totally insecure. The other day I was battling some guy on twitter who claimed to be part native (he looks like a blonde white guy) he was telling me about how he tried to harm himself and self-mutilated over being called a Redskin so he made it his mission to fix the team name. I call total BS on that. NO one uses the word Redskin to put down a Native person they use real slurs. People are too damn insecure, sensitive and some are just lairs to support their cause. Some need therapy instead of trying to change the name of a ballteam. Redskins is not a slur or offensive, it’s all fake outrage and media driven. HTTR!